Kodak Ektar 100 Film Stock Review - Why not just buy Portra 160?

[@danfloresmusic]

Ektar is the hardest color negative film to scan right in my experience. I had a hard time on the epson V850 and Silver Fast. It scans beautifully with the Pakon F135 and the Noritsu HS-1800- I have used both and being really pleased with the results- I need to use correct developing temperature, time and chemicals in order to get acceptable results form Ektar.. I wouldn't ever use a press kit on Ektar, specially when it has been used before. I process it with fresh Kodak Flexicolor C41 chemicals (bleach and fix separated) on a Jobo or Filmomat processor for consistency. I would also shoot portra if I didn't have access to any of the above or a lab, así it is also more forgiving than Ektar in tricky lighting and exposure. - Keep the videos coming bro! I really enjoy them.

[@ribsy]

very interesting. thats a lot of work just for Ektar! 😬 but yea, i find that it just doesn't scan well without the need for adjustments. i am going to try some more ektar tho, especially in sunset/golden hour light and see what happens. curious to see how the different light scene affects my output. thanks for watching 👍🏽

[@srad.]

I also got a lot of magenta in my roll as well. Not one of my favorite rolls but I'd probably give it another shot. Beautiful photos!!

[@ribsy]

Yea! It seems like it’s an exposure thing + potentially a software thing. I will keep experimenting!

[@ConstantThrowing]

Shot a can of this in 35mm just recently, well there 6 frames left. Loaded in an eos600. In terms of camera: Trying auto after limiting myself to a fixed lens half frame medium format camera from that only has 1/50 and B... and a semi broken Zenit-E that chewed most of a roll the first time I used it. Really nice rundown of the stock, man. Much appreciated.

[@ribsy]

Oh nice! I think you’ll really like ektar

[@ConstantThrowing]

@@ribsy developing it tonight 🤞🤞 can't wait. Really varied roll too.

[@behindeachfilmgrain]

Your results from Ektar 100 looked beautiful Ribs! I would try scanning them on FujiFilm SP3000 Frontier scanner for different results! I shoot this film a lot and if you are ever curious on the different results in this film... Send the negatives to me and I will scan them on the FujiFilm SP3000 Frontier so that you can see if you would like it better brother! The only charge would be the mailing of the film to me and scanning would be on me! DM me if you are interested! Love the results as per usual my friend! Keep in mind that shooting landscape photography using Ektar 100 (120 film) will yield better results than your standard 35mm film roll. I feel that the 120 will give you better dynamic range in your color tones and depending on your subject matter... Ofter warmer tones but judging on the surrounding landscape with luscious green tones I would have used FujiFilm Pro 400H.

[@ribsy]

thanks for the offer! i may take you up on that next time i get around to shooting some ektar 😊 i try not to get too picky with film, but i find myself preferring film that doesn't "have a look" or at least keeps the look to a minimum. although I do like some good saturation. it's becoming stressful deciding what film to use in different scenarios 😂

[@pilsplease7561]

@@ribsy I actually hate portra for example but love ektar, it reminds me of slide film a lot. But its not slide film and thats what makes it special. I do also love Ektachrome 100. I have shot both in 120 and 35mm but have started preferring 35mm because i can get it developed cheaper and its also got 35 exposures which is a bonus for me. getting 8 shots on my 6x9 camera is painfully expensive. But I get the best slides you would ever see.

[@PhotoMeLarry]

The mountain peak with the clouds parted above it... bangs! Lovely shot brother.

[@ribsy]

thanks! yea, the landscape really got it together for me haha. sometimes you get lucky. thanks my g 💪🏽

[@rossferguson3463]

Your videos are super educational and entertaining, huge fan of what you're doing! Melbourne Aus is in lockdown currently so I'm travelling the world vicariously through your videos lol

[@ribsy]

haha thanks for watching! yea, lockdown is a bit of an issue currently 😅 glad the videos are entertaining 😊

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

Love Portra when I shot weddings but tried Ektar 120 100 couple of months ago for landscapes and I really can’t fault it I’m constantly impressed with this film. I’ve never noticed the colour cast at all although I get the negs developed and scanned professionally as I also don’t do prints as I don’t have space in the van🚐😆 nice review mate gotta love the Lake District my fave is Ullswater 📷❤️

[@ribsy]

Yea ektar is awesome. I have since figured things out and really love the results I get

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

Doing Film Things i reckon the more you use it the better it gets much like my hair clippers first time it was just a trim off the locks now the damn thing is down to skin 🥺

[@YoYoYo]

I found out that the purple/blueish cast in the shadow comes from underexposure. Read somewhere that when not shot in direct sunlight, its more of a 50 iso film. So I suggest to overexpose this film by 2 stops and it will be completely different picture. the downside is that you need a tripod :) NLP struggles with this film. It does not scan easily as Portra. Frontier S-3000 and Nortitsu 1800 does not have problem color balancing this film. Try e good scanner with it.

[@ribsy]

Hey - that makes a lot of sense! I figured it had something to do with the exposure 😁. Def gonna keep that in mind going forward. Thanks!

[@klasgelinder]

@@ribsy Ektar is very sensitiv to blues and since shadows are mostly blues, if you underexpose the shadows, most of what is picked up is blue.

[@stephendevore3902]

From what I have seen stick with porta 160.You gut feeling says alot.With Ektar and its magenta problem could be a chemical issues. Whether its the film or processing the true way is to compare the different batches of film and see if it was an anomaly with that batch.You work with them alot so you can see differences between the two.Good Video 🙂😎

[@ribsy]

thanks for watching! i think the issue was actually scanning. i wasn't doing a good job / NLP was having issues with these images for some reason. i got amazing results with different software, later on. i am actually a fan of ektar now 😅

[@jenohogan9254]

I definitely had a strong magenta cast in my images when i shot with this film stock. Ektar is between $15-20 in Canada.

[@ribsy]

yea it seems like the scanning is the tough part. how did you scan?

[@jenohogan9254]

@@ribsy I think I used my DSLR and negative lab pro. I got some pretty funky results. I was new to DSLR scanning at the time.

[@ribsy]

Yea same combo for me. Funny enough using other software gave me much better results

[@jenohogan9254]

@@ribsy Hmmm I'll make note of this and trying something different down the road. Thanks for the tip. 😃

[@eddie_g]

How did i not know about your channel! Subbed! Great to find another good film channel

[@ribsy]

Awesome - thanks for the support! 😀

[@ZoneFocused]

Yep, I’ve got magenta tones on Ektar when it’s under exposed. I’ve shot a roll at 400 and forgot to push develop. Got images but they did have a strong color cast. That’s kinda on the extreme end, but similar results.

[@ribsy]

yea its evident. i'm hearing similar things from lots of people. seems like this one is simply a pain to scan. good thing it prints lovely

[@robertknight4672]

Ektar is good if you really want to saturate reds and yellows and pinks. I ran this film through an old Kodak pony camera this spring. I took a picture of a stone Viaduct at sunset. That was about a 6 second exposure and the magenta really creeped in on the gray stone causing it to look more Rose Colored. If you're shooting the sunset itself you can really take advantage of the saturation. I had my film developed by a lab.

[@ribsy]

Sweet. Def gonna try at sunset - many have recommended it!

[@vimerveilles]

Tbh i had the opposite experience shooting with ektar, but i also shot it on a really, really sunny day. Also a lot of great pictures I see on ektar are very sunny, so maybe its more of the occasion rather than the film. I like the hues in your photos though. I don't see any issues. If I took them I'd be hyped about it.

[@ribsy]

thanks for watching. yea, i think the results will vary based on the scene and lighting. i do plan on trying this film some more in sunny conditions, not overcast. i do like my photos in the end, but just felt like i didn't understand why ektar was highly regarded for landscapes specifically. looking forward to seeing future results 😊

[@SonOfWalhall]

Love Ektar. Only negative what i heard is it brings out red in portraits, which might not be do flattering. Havent seent it myself, shooting in sunlight. And yes, with sharp lenses it gets super crisp

[@ribsy]

Yea it does tend to bring out the red

[@mynameiscal]

I love the way it renders on older uncoated lenses - every shot feels like a slide from the 70s! BUT, I've definitely noticed the magenta cast more when underexposed on those older lenses. Could that be the issue you had?

[@ribsy]

that's a good point! however, i shot many of these images with a Canon L 17-40 which is a professional lens. so i assume that lens should be able to render colors properly. perhaps on the Agfa medium format shots, yes, that lens is very very old.

[@pushingfilm]

Hey man, this is my favourite color neg film (love Portra 160 also) and I generally don't get that color cast in my shots, if anything there's sometimes a little blue cast, or oversaturated reds. It's usually more punchy than these examples for me. I don't necessarily think it's your process though, as Ektar is notoriously hard to scan! especially if you're doing it yourself.

[@ribsy]

good thing to know! i was worried i was messing it up. definitely seems like this film just isn't designed for scanning. makes sense since C41 is originally aimed at printing. gonna give it a go again at some point - still hoping to make some great images with it. gotta put it head to head with Portra 160 as well.

[@hal4192]

Some great photos there! 👍🏻 Good review. Thanks.

[@ribsy]

thanks

[@certs743]

Ektar definitely has a magenta cast if you underexpose it. It also has much more saturated colours which is another reason it is popular for landscapes. It can really make colours pop. I used to shoot alot of it years ago and here in Canada it used to be the cheapest pro film you could buy for colour film. I don't shoot much colour film anymore so I haven't used it much recently but Kodak prices keep going up here.

[@ribsy]

Yea! I’ve come around to ektar. I really like it nowadays. It’s def my go to for classic landscapes

[@philipfoster7269]

The magenta caste is what put me off Ektar but I will try it again.

[@ribsy]

Yea def try again! It’s the scanning not the film

[@PhilKnall]

I have definitely noticed that Ektar is not great for overcast days. It's amaaaazing in sunlight though. One of my favorites.

[@ribsy]

Yea true! I started to notice that after reviewing all the different types of shots that I got. Seems like it’s a bit finicky

[@PhilKnall]

@@ribsy yep needs lots of light. But when it hits it hits :)

[@SISSI_LU]

Very informative 👍

[@ribsy]

thanks! glad it was useful

[@Ryanjleonephotography]

Hey my dude! Great photos! Are you based in New York? Because that photo of the blue car was in front of the Apple store I worked at in Williamsburg Brooklyn.

[@ribsy]

hey - thanks! i'm actually from NYC but live in the UK now. i was back in NYC 2 weeks ago for some time. i def took that photo right as I walked by the apple store in Williamsburg haha. small world 😊 here is the video i made of my trip back to NYC - kzbin.info/www/bejne/eIC6f6ilp9WgfLc

[@strampy75]

Portra 160 has beautiful colours when there is a lot of light. With overcast the pictures tend to be desaturated. This is weakness of many colour negative films and is an area where Ektar shines. No matter if you have fog, overcast, etc., the colours will always be excellent. With the autumn colours there is also no match. They are beautiful with Ektar. For city landscapes I prefer Portra (Ektar goes sometimes over the top) and I would never use Ektar for Portraits because of its weird skin tones.

[@ribsy]

great point! ektar is gonna pop colors regardless. i've turned it around -- really love ektar

[@matthewsoza417]

I think this film is good for doing straight prints, because of the saturation with the colors. It makes it easy to make a print without having to do much editing unlike portra which is a more editing friendly film.

[@ribsy]

yea i think i agree with that. i really liked what ektar can achieve in the darkroom. totally agree, portra seems to be more digital edit friendly

[@maxiuxoxo]

I LOVE Ektar 100. It’s got the most beautiful colours. I love it for just my general use film

[@ribsy]

Yea totally see the appreciation for bold color. My plan is to try again in different lighting and use different software for handling the negative scans. Let’s see what happens

[@maxiuxoxo]

It shines so much in the sun ☀️ but slight overcast 🌫 doesn’t look bad either, colours aren’t as crazy saturated but still sharp and beautiful. I want to try out pushing it when I get my next batch

[@FabrizioZago]

I like this film stock, I've used it in the past but I've never had a magenta cast. I've used it also on medium format, I like the fine grain.

[@ribsy]

i actually like it now as well. turns out that when i tried scanning with another software, aside from NLP, i got great results

[@FabrizioZago]

@@ribsy Glad you've found it out ;-)

[@cenxiwang2337]

Hi there, it's said that under the digital process, ektar renders smoother than portra while the latter resolves better, just wondering what do you think about it in terms of darkroom workflow?

[@ribsy]

i havent printed either in a while. need to get back in the darkroom some more

[@randallstewart175]

Ektar is a high saturation, higher contrast film. Porta 160, aand in general, is a low contrast, low saturation film, designed for portrait work (dah!). Why do many folks, particularly on YT, prefer Porta? Because you can deviate from the technical norms of film shooting and make corrections in contrast and color balance when digital processing the images more easily with Porta. Porta is universal with all those "one stop over box speed" guys who actually plan to abuse their film. I suppose in that context, Porta is "better". For the minority who shoot film to make wet prints in a darkroom, both films work well because you have very little control over contrast or saturation when printing with that technology. You have to match the film characteristics to the subject. That also answers the question,"why does Kodak make both films".

[@ribsy]

yea the film def have their different uses. i've changed my mind since and def like the ektar alot

[@seantomlinson3320]

Very cool. I shot a roll at my local gardens but haven't had it developed yet. Two more rolls on the way for some landscapes in the next couple of weeks. I'm still new to film so do you recommend I just over expose by one stop? Perhaps I should bracket right on and +1 stop?

[@ribsy]

i actually think ektar does just fine being exposed box speed. however, it doesn't hurt to bracket your shots especially if you are shooting 35mm.

[@GraemeSimpsonPhotography]

i just bought 10 rolls of Ektar for some landscape shots in Cornwall soon...hope it turns out good!!! I did just burn a roll for shots of my daughter and have to say the colours pop and are full of contrast so maybe it's a film that needs strong colours to shine. Perhaps Autumn is where this film could come to life

[@ribsy]

hey! im headed to cornwall soon as well. def plan on bringing some ektar and experimenting a bit as well. i'm not gonna give up on it yet! totally agree on saturation - this film brings it!

[@GraemeSimpsonPhotography]

@@ribsy going last week of August, if you're down I'm going to keeping an eye out :)

[@ribsy]

I’ll be there then. Let’s chat on IG

[@the6millionpman424]

Ektar is my go to emulsion, I do tend to shoot it in bright sunlight with lots of bright colours so that's probably why I like the results BUT I can definitely see why it might not be to everyone's taste

[@ribsy]

yea good call. i def want to shoot this more and will wait for a day with some great sunshine in the forecast. ive seen too many amazing ektar images to doubt this film lol

[@the6millionpman424]

@@ribsy This is taken on Ektar in VERY bright sunshine last year in Parma in Italy instagram.com/p/BxPXCAdgD1w/?

[@ribsy]

I love that shot. Such great colors 😃

[@the6millionpman424]

@@ribsy thanks man :)

[@AnaloguePhoto]

Have a roll of Ektar 100 in my closet. Will probably shoot it with my Minox GT. This is in my line of first rolls of films since 2002. What camera did you use (did I miss out on something when I got my cup of coffee?) Was it the Isolette?

[@ribsy]

def give ektar a go. i hear bright sunny days are best for this film. i still need to try that. i used a canon 300c and an isolette iii. 😊

[@warwickwallace2699]

Some great shots there man

[@ribsy]

much appreciated 😊

[@samtenthije2419]

I personally don't use NLP because it doesn't give accurate colours of I compare them to my prints. silverfast's negafix is a million times better. I have compared them side by side with some really high resolution scans and to get to the colours I like NLP takes a lot of work after scanning, while with silverfast it's just so much faster and much more accurate

[@ribsy]

i still do enjoy NLP. but i now realize that it is worth trying other options especially for different film stocks. sometimes results do differ dramatically

[@samtenthije2419]

@@ribsy i mean, it works really well if you like to tweak little things and especially with lightroom combined it is extremely powerful, but silverfast is the perfect software if you just want good and accurate results without a lot of work. Neither one is a better option, especially when you have lightroom, which can just do everything you want it to

[@radfordphoto]

I haven't had much experience with Ektar, but it seems it is a highly saturated and contrasty film compared to Portra. I think you will find the film's colour cast on overcast days is that the colour temperature is not daylight balanced. Next time you photograph on an overcast day, try using a slight warming filter, such as the 81series of filters, EG 81b 81c. Same applies for working in the shade, regardless of film stock.

[@ribsy]

interesting tip. i never considered that but i def will have to try it

[@freacky22]

I also found ektar to have pinkish tones. Especially in skin tones it's very hard to correct for them

[@ribsy]

Yea it’s more obvious on lighter skin tones

[@HOUSCOUS]

Shot a roll of 135mm Ektar 100. Expired 5 years. Still got the magenta even rated it as 50.

[@ribsy]

Interesting

[@ulrikchristiansen]

Hm... In Denmark, Ektar is 7,89 pounds a roll, while portra 160 is 10,43 pounds a roll. Nice pictures you made!

[@ribsy]

oh interesting! that's a very bizarre price difference. typically they are very similar in price. thanks for watching!

[@spokzac12]

@@ribsy Ektar is probably imported more into his country because of the popularity

[@LKNL13]

NLP has issues with Ektar, it’s a known thing. I would recommend either using the LUTs provided by Nate (or use the beta) or try out something like Grain2Pixel which is free :)

[@ribsy]

oh really?? good to know 😬i still do appreciate this stock but definitely find it a bit annoying to scan. def gonna try the other scanning methods!

[@LKNL13]

Doing Film Things yeah! I had issues with Ektar when using NLP. It’s worth checking out the beta of NLP (you can get it from the Facebook group) as it has some LUTs built in for it. May also be worth checking out silverfast if you have it :)

[@H2A2I00]

Have you ever shot some portraiture on it? I heard that it is particularly good for darker skin tones

[@ribsy]

Ive been hearing that lot as well. I did shoot some portraits of my parents. I over exposed tho (accidentally) so I didn’t get good skin tones. Their skin is somewhat in the middle of the spectrum and was washed out anyways. Def gonna try again soon tho 💪🏽

[@ZainRiza]

I kinda agree. It’s pro-level film stock but it’s not actually that versatile. It’s pretty unusable for portraits. Makes skin tones look weirdly red.

[@ribsy]

yea makes sense. i'm hearing from several people that it works great for darker skin. perhaps the extra red accentuates the tones seen on darker skin. pretty intrigued by the idea - def gonna test it out.

[@roberthennings]

Ektar is no good on overcast days, try shooting it in golden hour sunlight, then its amazing. Very tricky film.

[@ribsy]

sounds good. i have shot tons of it over the last week, including some great sunny days. let's see how it goes 😃

[@joanmichel]

we need to go hiking next time!! forget the city haha!!

[@ribsy]

Haha yes! Would totally be down for that 😁

[@MarcusLloyd]

Enjoyed this one bro

[@ribsy]

Thanks 🙏🏾

[@owenskene3946]

How do your prints look Streight from the developer?

[@ribsy]

Not sure what you mean

[@owenskene3946]

@@ribsy Just wanted to know how the prints looked after they returned from the camera lab

[@stefanol9272]

Personally I am bit mixed with Portra but again it depends what for. Street photos Ektar portraits hmm portra but I prefer a Fuji C200 or Ektachrome. I somehow think portra makes people look pale and a bit sick 😂😂😂😂

[@ribsy]

haha i feel you

[@matthewsantomarco2714]

Try shooting Ektar 100 during sunset or sunrise. I think you might change your mind!

[@ribsy]

Yea agreed! That is my plan for next week - gonna give ektar a try again in sunset. Will also concert my negatives using a different software to see what happens

[@IainHC1]

Maybe it's the scanner and software at fault and not the film.

[@ribsy]

yea - that's what i was thinking. C41 is designed for printing after all, so we can't get too upset that the scans are a bit of a pain

[@linjicakonikon7666]

Gotta be honest, your corrected images feel too green. I'll take the magenta over green any day of the week.

[@ribsy]

It’s all subjective 😀

[@TashapeshapeTah]

Lake district 😍

[@ribsy]

yea! such a beautiful place

[@AI-Hallucination]

Lets talk about how bad film photography is for the environment

[@ribsy]

it definitely isn't great. i'm still wrestling with the idea and how i play a part in this

[@AI-Hallucination]

@@ribsy something to think about man probably 3000 dlsr in the ocean too but its not talked about its how cool it is

[@ribsy]

Yea I’ve considered it. I just don’t have any good answers currently, other than shoot less film. And that one seems too simple/brutal of a solution. Hope there are additional things that can be done. At least we buy lots of used cameras - no additional natural resource use there and lots of recycling. The actual film is a different story

[@AI-Hallucination]

@@ribsy no-win situation haha film is amazing tho and glad it has been made popular again sheing young people with analog cameras always cheers me up tho

[@AI-Hallucination]

@@rossb48 thanks dude 😍 nuff love

[@joevelezart]

I think it's especially great with reds and greens. I love it for cityscapes and wide street scenes. But it's definitely a fair question whether its worth getting over Portra 160. I tend to keep Ektar in the fridge and occasionally grab a roll for casual shooting.

[@ribsy]

totally. greens and reds seem to jump on the film very nicely. i may try and do a head to head at some point, because i truly am curious if there is a point!?

[@joevelezart]

I'd be interested to see what you think of Agfa Ultra 100. Its expensive but I was given some and was surprised at how unique it is. Cant think of anything that compares.